Author
Topic: The Next EOS M? [CR1] (Read 20786 times)

Why all the hate on the M? Anyone who has used mirrorless cameras knows the AF is the weak point, and otherwise the M is an amazing little camera. It got some bad reviews from people who didn't take the time to get to know the camera, and those negatives have been repeated over and over by a bunch of trolls. I'd like to see how many poopooers have actually used one.

Why all the hate on the M? Anyone who has used mirrorless cameras knows the AF is the weak point, and otherwise the M is an amazing little camera. It got some bad reviews from people who didn't take the time to get to know the camera, and those negatives have been repeated over and over by a bunch of trolls. I'd like to see how many poopooers have actually used one.

+1 I think too many people who don't even have this camera complain about it.

</strong>Along with last week’s 7D spec list, we also received what is said to be the next EOS-M camera. A lot of people haven’t jumped on the EOS-M system yet, whether it’s the bad rap the AF gets, or the lack of lenses in the system, sales are quite weak for the little EOS camera. Most people seem to want something a little bit higher end, or at least be able to add accessories to improve the usability of the camera.</p><p><strong>Specifcations

</strong></p><ul><li>24mp APS-C Sensor</li><li>New generation AF system</li><li>DIGIC V</li><li>Removable Electronic Viewfinder (Very high resolution)</li><li>Optional grip attachment</li><li>5fps</li><li>Slightly larger than the current EOS M</li><li>Introduced with 3 more lenses</li><li>$999 USD</li></ul><p>Now, all of that sounds like pretty much everyones wish list, so take this CR1 rumor with a grain of salt. I will say that the next EOS M camera is definitely pointing to being higher end from other information we’ve received. An entry level EOS M system camera could be coming in early 2014 and sit in the sub $500 category.</p><p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>

Why all the hate on the M? Anyone who has used mirrorless cameras knows the AF is the weak point, and otherwise the M is an amazing little camera. It got some bad reviews from people who didn't take the time to get to know the camera, and those negatives have been repeated over and over by a bunch of trolls. I'd like to see how many poopooers have actually used one.

As an owner/user of this camera I have to agree, actually. It really isn't nearly as bad as folks are making it sound.

Why all the hate on the M? Anyone who has used mirrorless cameras knows the AF is the weak point, and otherwise the M is an amazing little camera. It got some bad reviews from people who didn't take the time to get to know the camera, and those negatives have been repeated over and over by a bunch of trolls. I'd like to see how many poopooers have actually used one.

The EOS-M is just dandy until you start comparing it with the competition. Canon's offering is too-little-too-late. Olympus and Panasonic have already spent years refining AF and developing a system of lenses.

Canon comes into the market late with a me-too offering -- no innovation, weak lens system, and under-speced compared to similarly priced peers. You can get away with charging a premium if you are the market leader (as they are in DSLRs). The mistake is that they are not a leader in mirrorless cameras (actually they are pretty close to dead last at least among the major players).

As a DSLR vendor, they are justly aggorant. As a mirrorless vendor, they are just arrogant.

canon rumors FORUM

Hmmmm.... for two years prior to the introduction of the Eos-M, Canon's entry into the mirrorless market was a hot top on CanonRumors. Curiously, Canon ignored nearly every suggestion made, and it's turned out to be a failure. Who'd have thought?

After picking up my first mirrorless camera about two years ago, I've had a strong interest in the segment and have been watching it closely as it evolved. If I was going to relaunch it, I'd: -

1. Develop a lens roadmap, make it public and stick to it. Canon is competing against well-established systems. With only two Eos-M lenses, there is little market confidence that Canon is serious about this segment. Adopters need to know the system will be supported. Canon needs to communicate with their customers and provide timely firmware updates to fix problems and improve the camera.

2. Develop high quality "L" grade lenses. Anecdotally, I'd say a higher percentage of experienced photographers buy mirrorless cameras. They want superior, high quality lenses. With EF compatibility, there is only a need for handful of native focal lengths - 18, 35, 50, 85 and 135 would cover it, along with a couple of consumer zooms.

3. I don't think autofocus is that important (but obviously still needs to be "ok") and should be as good as a DSLR in liveview. With mirrorless cameras, the key ingredients are image quailty and portability. I detected some anti-Eos M sentiments in earlier posts. And while I'd agree that a DSLR is an optimal mix of features and image quality for most people, it isn't the right solution for all people. With an increasing number of elderly photographers, hikers, bikers, travellers, people that don't want to carry 2kg of camera gear on their shoulders all day, people that don't want to look conspicuous, people that like shooting with Infra Red filters etc etc there is rapidly growing interest in smaller and lighter gear. Many people will happily trade size for slower autofocus. But very few people will trade image quality for anything. In theory, the design of a mirrorless camera could/should be able to produce technically better images. Canon needs to put this theory into action. They need to demonstrate that full frame cmaeras aren't the only game in town.

4. The two camera strategy is a good idea. To set them apart from the competitors, the higher end camera should have substantial weather sealing. It needs to be well built, made of metal and have sufficient buttons and dials to have all main features readily accessible - ie it needs to be a "photographers" camera and not a tarted up P & S. It also needs an EVF (and maybe a viewfinder). It needs a weak infrared filter. Focus peaking with manual focus lenses would be well regarded. Both cameras need to look good. And they have to be distinctive. They have to be something that you would be proud to own. Personally, I'd go with retro Canonet styling. But modern styling can also look good - I'd just try to make it more angular than some of Canon's recent work. Battery life is also very important. These cameras aren't going to be pocketable anyway, so don't scrimp on the battery - give us something that can last all day.

While I'm not surprised that the Eos-M hasn't performed well, I am happy that Canon is in this market. It is an important market with the growing number of people seeing the benefits of high quality, but smaller and lighter gear. I'm just hoping that Canon will produce a camera that I'd like to buy.

« Last Edit: April 28, 2013, 02:09:59 AM by Hillsilly »

Logged

Camera Obscura

paul13walnut5

Tried one in store, with af set to single point (the way I've always used any AF camera other than my EOS 3) and in both one shot and servo modes it is well up to my needs and expectations from this kind of camera.

Tried one in store, with af set to single point (the way I've always used any AF camera other than my EOS 3) and in both one shot and servo modes it is well up to my needs and expectations from this kind of camera.

A little too late I just sold a Sony Nex 6 and bought an M with both lenses.Don't belive all the hype I thought it sucked. The battery lasted about an hour the iq is not as good as the M.It's always is focusing and no way to turn it off andeats batteries like candy.It does focus a little faster for sure,but it's no SLR either.Also do any of you naysayers here actually own one?